To start with, let’s look at the word “homophobe”. An ‘arachnaphobe’ is a person afraid of spiders. An ‘agoraphobe’ is a person afraid of crowded, public places. (agora = ‘market’). Thus, a ‘homophobe’ would be either a person afraid of anything the same or, a person afraid of homosexuals. But how many people have you really run into that say, “I’m afraid of homosexuals.” as opposed to people who say, “I think homosexuality is immoral.”? Having a moral opinion is NOT the same as being AFRAID of something, so calling it “homophobia” is hardly a proper term.

Next, the article boldy claims, “..only now has a scientific study come out with proof.” That’s interesting, there’s not a shred of this ‘proof’ anywhere in the article. There are some opinions from psychologists, but that’s not proof any more than Dr. Spock’s opinion that children shouldn’t be spanked is any kind of ‘proof’. Not even a professional opinion is ‘proof’. However, when you have an agenda to push, presenting facts suddenly becomes too bothersome to deal with.

And who are these ‘homophobes’ that the study focused on? The article states in a quote, ““Individuals who identify as straight but in psychological tests show a strong attraction to the same sex may be threatened by gays and lesbians because homosexuals remind them of similar tendencies within themselves.”

So, a person “who identifies as straight” are the subjects known as ‘homophobes’. If you’re straight.. you must be a homophobe. And it was a trained psychologist who is trying to push this idea? Doesn’t he know that many straight people don’t even care about or think about homosexuals? Doesn’t he realize many straight people support the gay agenda, even though they are lifelong heterosexuals? (straight) Does he even know what the word “phobic” means? I doubt it.

And this is all aside from the obvious conclusion that, if the supposed ‘straight person with homosexual tendencies‘ is already leaning towards being gay.. they’d be ATTRACTED to homosexuals, not “threatened” by them or afraid of them.

Finally, if straight people have ‘homosexual tendencies or desires’ and yet CHOOSE to live a straight lifestyle.. that flies in the face of the gay community who says that homosexuality is “wired in” at birth and cannot be denied, causing a person to desire a gay relationship far more naturally than a straight one. Can’t have it both ways. Can’t one minute say there are thousands, perhaps millions of straight people resisting their hard-wired “gay-gene” (still as yet as unproven as Bigfoot or Aliens) and the next minute say that homosexuality cannot be resisted because ‘choice’ is not a factor.

I’m all for editorialism. But I have a high disregard for slanted agendas trying to pass themselves off as objective journalism. If someone supports gay rights, let them boldy write that as their opinion in an editorial format. But don’t disguise it under a thin layer of subjective “science” as if it were ‘proof’ or objective journalism with no bias in either direction. At best it’s sloppy, misleading journalism aimed at the mentally lazy. And for the gay agenda it only weakens their credibility among intelligent people who actually digest what they read.